A Fort Stewart soldier’s battle for custody of his young daughter has reached the U.S. Supreme Court.

Justices of the court will hear oral arguments today from the attorneys representing Army Sgt. First Class Jeff Chafin and his estranged wife, Lynne Hales Chafin, a Scottish national who has been living for the past year in her homeland with 5-year-old Eris Chafin.

The Chafin v. Chafin case has grown from a bitter divorce and custody battle in Alabama to the nation’s highest court, where the issue at hand is whether a right of appeal for custody exists when a child is no longer living on American soil.

In October 2011, U.S. District Judge Inge Johnson ruled that Jeff had failed to prove that Eris was a habitual U.S. resident and ordered the girl returned to her mother in Scotland. Lynne and Eris flew to Scotland shortly thereafter.

In February, Jeff’s appeal to a two-judge panel of the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals was dismissed on the grounds that the U.S. court system lacked authority to rule on an appeal made under the Hague Convention once children have left the country.

However, Marietta-based lawyer Michael Manely, Jeff Chafin’s attorney, said that finding doesn’t apply in this particular case. He says that Lynne Chafin intended to reside in the U.S. with her daughter and that the outcome of the case has serious implications for military residents in places such as the Savannah area, which is close to two military bases.

“If you’re in the military, you’re more likely to be married to an international spouse than the population at large,” Manely said.

Child custody cases are often emotional but that those involving parents from different countries only complicate them, said Paul Kurtz, an associate dean at the University of Georgia School of Law who specializes in family law.

“It happens quite often and there are lawyers who specialize in this, there are international conventions about this and there are statutes in most states, including (Georgia), in which the issue is addressed,” said Kurtz.

“If the Supreme Court of the United States takes the case, it’s almost certain that it’s not an easy case.”

Jeff and Lynne met online and were married in 2006 while he was stationed in Germany, where Eris, their only child, was born. The couple have had a rocky relationship over the years, including at least one arrest of Lynne Chafin, who was charged with domestic violence in 2010.

Lynne Chafin, 35, was deported last year for overstaying a temporary visa. She cannot return to the U.S., said her Washington, D.C.-based attorney Stephen Cullen.

Jeff Chafin, who served two tours in Afghanistan and has lived a month in Hinesville, said he’s concerned about the safety of his daughter and wants her back in the U.S. She lived with her father for nearly two years in Alabama, where he was stationed, following Lynne Chafin’s deportation while the couple attempted to salvage their marriage.

Jeff Chafin has lobbied members of Congress to amend existing laws to establish citizenship for foreign nationals whom the military moves to the U.S. Such relocations are taxpayer-funded and are a sign of a foreign national’s intent to establish residency, he and his attorney argue.

“If the military moves a foreign national here then they would be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States court system,” Jeff Chafin said.

Cullen, a native of Scotland, said his client’s objective is simply to live in Scotland with her daughter and that she has not attempted to deny Jeff Chafin the right to see Eris, in spite of the couple’s pending divorce.

“She wants Sgt. Chafin to be fully involved in Eris’ life as his obligation to the Armed Services permits,” said Cullen.

“It’s always a challenge for military, but there’s been no attempt ever to restrict his access. But the child is going to school in Scotland and what needs to happen is for all this to end so that the child can visit her dad in America.”

On Aug. 13, Jeff Chafin’s last attempt to bring his daughter back to America was kept alive when the Supreme Court granted his certiorari petition to hear the case. He said he was told there was a less than 1 percent chance it would do so.

Some in the legal community following the case were surprised that Cullen didn’t fight the petition, but he said he didn’t want to stand in the way of necessary closure for both sides.

Much is at stake in the matter, said Manely, who is arguing his first case before the Supreme Court. If federal courts don’t retain authority over the removal of children from the country, then those who seek to take children away without both parents’ permission will be further encouraged, he said.

“I don’t see the Supreme Court neutering our courts and saying we can’t do anything to help American parents with American children,” Manely said.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Oral arguments are over. Hopefully when all is said and done parents of U.S. children born to foreign spouses will be able to breathe a sigh of relief that should the worst case scenario arise and their spouse take off with their child, our government is not without power to do something about it. In short, that is what is at stake. The firm is honored to have had the opportunity to argue this case before the United States Supreme Court and we are confident that justice will prevail.